When Tervalon and Murray-Garcia (1998), both renowned physicians, educators and activists (e.g., melanietervalon.com), first introduced the term, cultural humility, into the literature approximately 25 years ago (Tervalon & Murray-Garcia, 1998), they may well not have realised how impactful and far reaching their new concept would become. What was then new has now become a vital and integral part of a general ethic and culture of care (Foronda, 2020;Hook et al., 2017), increasingly recognised by, and practice affecting, across a host of varied professions and disciplines, including medicine, nursing, the allied health professions, business/management and religion/spirituality (Davis et al., 2020). That effect has been equally and powerfully felt in the areas of psychotherapy and clinical supervision as well.Cultural humility has emerged as part of the broader study of humility, which has seemingly exploded across this past decade (e.g., Worthington & Allison, 2018). Although a host of possible forms of humility have been proposed, three have been most consistently identified and researched: relational, intellectual, and cultural.

Although psychology and religion deal with overlapping subject matter, the relationship between psychology and the church has a tumultuous history. The current study examined religious leaders' attitudes toward integrating psychological science into church ministry. Religious leaders (N ϭ 394) completed measures of (a) congregants' mental health and social concerns, (b) attitudes toward psychological science (i.e., perceived barriers of integration, compatibility with church ministry), and (c) hypothesized predictors of attitudes toward the integration of psychology and church ministry (i.e., political conservatism, intratextual fundamentalism, religious intellectual humility, emotional intelligence). Overall, religious leaders expressed both positive and negative attitudes toward psychology. Conservative political orientation and intratextual fundamentalism were associated with negative attitudes toward integration, whereas religious intellectual humility and emotional intelligence were associated with positive attitudes. We conclude by discussing limitations, suggestions for future research, and practical applications for psychologists and church leaders.

No abstract

No abstract

Traumatic events, such as natural disasters, often lead to significant resource loss for survivors, which can negatively affect emotional well-being. In these situations, it is common for people to draw on their religious or spiritual faith to cope with their pain and struggle. One construct that has received increased attention within the field of religious/ spiritual coping is spiritual fortitude (SF). SF refers to one's ability to draw on spiritual resources to transcend negative emotions in the face of stressors . In this review, we analyze eight empirical studies with 3,455 total participants. Specifically, we explore the relationship between SF and mental health and well-being, with a particular focus on its role in traumatic contexts (e.g., natural disasters). SF has been found to demonstrate a series of positive mental health benefits including higher meaning in life, spiritual well-being, positive religious coping, and perceived posttraumatic growth. We discuss areas for future research and implications for clinical practice, with specific consideration to coping with the COVID-19 pandemic.